Latest

“Receiving credit for an image we created is a given, not compensation, and credit is not a substitute for payment.” – Tony Wu, Photographer

Credit is also not a substitute for asking for permission to use an image. Unfortunately, there have been several cases of photos from this or my other blogs being used elsewhere without my express permission. All photos published on this blog or on my Facebook pages or Twitter account are my own unless credited otherwise. Upon request, I may grant permission to use them but ask for credit to be given as ‘Matthias Lehmann/Matt Lemon Photography’. Once you publish my photos or videos on your blog or website, I expect you to share the link with me. Especially if you wish to use any of my photos in commercial or print publications, you must contact me prior to doing so. Before contacting me, I recommend reading Tony Wu’sReasons Why Professional Photographers Cannot Work for Free.

All permissions are given for non-profit use only. I retain all rights of my photography and videography work. The use of Yeoni Kim’s photos on this blog is prohibited. If you wish to use them, please contact me to facilitate communication with her. Unless credited otherwise, all other photos on this blog are licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. The above also applies for any use of text from this blog, should you wish to use any part or entire entries elsewhere: if a text is marked as not falling under the Creative Commons License, anyone wishing to republish it is expected to request permission from the respective copyright holders. If they cannot reach them, please contact me to facilitate communication with them.

Today, North-Rhine Westphalian Health Minister Barbara Steffens and Claudia Zimmermann-Schwartz, Chairwoman of the Roundtable Prostitution in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), held a press conference about the planned Prostitutes Protection Law (ProstSchG), which they argued would further drive sex workers into illegality instead of protecting them. As part of the press release, statements from two sex workers who participated in the Roundtable were presented.The following is an expanded statement from one of them, translated from the German original published by Voice4Sexworkers. Please clickhereto view the press release by the Ministry of Health, Equalities, Care and Ageing (MGEPA) in NRW. This resource is in German.

Statement by Melanie, Participant at Roundtable Prostitution

I’m a single mother of two and I’ve been working as a sex worker for the past ten years. I’ve never been able…

Constitutional Court rules ban on sex work constitutional

Yesterday, after over two years of deliberations and hearings, during at least one of which German news magazine DER SPIEGEL’s grossly inaccurate report about sex work in Germany was cited as “evidence”, the South Korean Constitutional Court issued its ruling on the constitutionality of the Anti-Sex Trade Laws, which criminalise all aspects of sex work. A majority of six of the nine judges ruled in favour of upholding the laws; two opposed the criminalisation of sex workers and advocated a Swedish Model-type legislation; and just one, Justice 조용호 Cho Yong Ho, opposed the constitutionality of the law entirely. In his dissent, he wrote,“The majority view insists that prostitution should not be protected by law because it harms human dignity. But nothing harms human dignity more than a threat to survival.”

After the ruling, 강현준 Kang Hyun-Joon and 장세희 Jang Sehee, director and vice director of 한터 Hanteo, the National Union of Sex Workers, spoke to the media. Kang stated, “Since the enforcement of the anti-prostitution law, sex labourers have struggled [for their rights]. The decision will push workers once again to death.” Jang said, “Aren’t we part of the Korean people? They have no consideration for us. We are not giving up the fight for our livelihood. We are people and workers just the same. We will not surrender to this ruling but will form a sex workers union and go all the way to the United Nations.” As Kang explained, Hanteo plans to make an appeal to the UN Commission on Human Rights

Unsurprisingly and callously, the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family as well as the Korean Women Lawyers Association have welcomed the decision. On a positive note, however, the media reported about a recent survey among 538 people above the age of 19, which – at least to my knowledge – produced the first-ever majority in favour of scrapping South Korea’s repressive anti-sex work laws. Needless to say, there was a big gender gap. About 6 out of ten men were in favour, but less than 4 out of ten women agreed with them.

Selected media coverage

Please note: The petition for a constitutional review was filed by sex worker Kim Jeong-mi, but it was Judge Oh Won Chan of the Northern District Court in Seoul who then filed the actual request to the Constitutional Court.

I also recommend reading a recent piece about South Korea published in the “Sex Workers Speak: Who listens?” series, guest-edited by P.G. Macioti and Giulia Garofalo Geymonat, which was co-authored by gay sex worker Yujin, feminist activist Popho Eun-Sil Park and myself.

Please show your support

After yesterday’s news, we now know that sex workers in South Korea will sadly have to continue their fight for years to come. Therefore, should you happen to use social media, I am sure it would mean a lot if you shared the news about the court’s decision widely and expressed your support for South Korean sex workers. They might not always click Like or Love or reply to you, but they’ll read your messages and appreciate them.

Film still from Grace Period (2015). Courtesy of Caroline Key and Kim KyungMook.

By YuJin, Popho E.S. Bark-Yi, and Matthias Lehmann

South Korea introduced a raft of new laws against sex work in 2004. These repressive policies are now up for constitutional review due to the intense reaction by sex workers there.

First-time visitors to South Korea may easily assume that selling sex is legal there, as major train stations are typically engulfed by an array of neon signs inviting patrons to enter massage parlors, noraebangs (lit. a ‘singing room’, essentially the same as a Japanese karaoke bar), and brothels. Media reports frequently quote statistics about thealleged net worthof the South Korean sex industry. However, laws repressing sex work are almost as ubiquitous as commercial sex venues themselves, particularly after 2004, when South Korea adopted the anti-sex trade Laws.

Between 2000 and 2002, a series of fires in Korea killed 24 sex workers, exposing the poor conditions in parts of its sex industry. In response, the government vowed to eradicate prostitution and embarked on an aggressive campaign against businesses facilitating it. Riding the wave of public outrage, women’s rights activists campaigned for a legal reform and their proposals eventually served as blueprints for the two-tiered anti-sex trade laws, which criminalise both buyers and sellers of sexual acts, except for anyone coerced into selling sex.

The new legislation reversed decades of de facto toleration of sex work by regulators and law enforcement. The anti-sex trade laws of 2004 replaced the Law Against Morally Depraved Behaviors (prostitution) of 1961, which wasn’t enforced homogeneously, and previously, eventhe government had actively engaged in organising commercial sex venuesto cater to US military personnel stationed on the Korean peninsula.

The anti-sex trade laws have caused many negative, allegedly unintended consequences. According to a2012 UN report, “police crackdowns from 2004-2009 resulted in [the] arrest of approximately 28,000 sex workers, 150,000 clients, and 27,000 sex business owners”, and 65,621 arrests were reported for 2009 alone. As researcher Sook Yi Oh Kim states, “the averageprosecution rateof sex workers is 26.3%, higher than that of sex buyers, and none of the sex workers arrested are treated as victims”. Police crackdowns have led to an overall reduction of red-light districts. Of 69 red-light districts that existed in 2002,44 remained by 2013. This representeda slight increase from 2007, when a government-commissioned report had located 35.

Police raids are often carried out very violently, and in November 2014, a 24-year old single mother died after jumping out of a motel roomto escape arrest by an undercover police officer posing as client. In stark contrast to their usual reporting, most Korean media remained distinctively silent about the case. The continued repression has forced an increasing number of sex workers to work underground, resulting in lower incomes, poorer working conditions, and an increase in violence perpetrated against them. Sex workers worry more about police raids than about screening their clients, an essential measure, as violence or mistreatment from clients are very common. A substantial number migrates to sell sex abroad, at times under exploitative conditions, as they calculate that conditions in Korea threaten them at least to the same extent butyield considerably lower earnings.

The trailer forGrace Period, which documents sex worker life and collective resistance in a South Korean brothel district.

Giant Girls and Hanteo against the law

Two organisations actively campaign for the rights of sex workers and against the laws. One is Hanteo, the National Union of Sex Workers, and the other is Giant Girls. Hanteo, which means ‘common ground’, was founded in 2004 and represents 15,000 sex workers as well as some brothel owners. Giant Girls, or GG, was founded in 2009 by a group of feminists along with a number of sex worker activists. GG aims at building a stronger sex worker movement to mobilise against the criminalisation of sex work, in part by working to remove the social stigma attached to sex work.

Yujin started selling sex online five years ago, in order to afford his tuition fees. YuJin self-identifies as a gay sex worker and is a member of GG. Prior to his entrance into the business he had never met anybody who was ‘out’ as a sex worker, and he knew nothing about how to work. Since all aspects of sex work are illegal in Korea, beginners often feel isolated and lack basic work and safety information. Yujin decided to tweet about his experience soon after he started working, which brought him into contact with other sex workers. Like him, these other sex workers did not ‘act immorally to earn easy money’, as the prejudice would have it, but worked hard, albeit without being respected as workers and citizens.

In 2005, sex workers established 29 June as the national day of solidarity with sex workers, coinciding with the date on which the laws were passed. Resistance from sex workers has taken many other forms. Protests organised by Hanteo in 2011 gained worldwide notoriety, as they culminated in dramatic scenes at the Yeondeungpo red-light district in Seoul, where some activists threatened to self-immolate as the confrontation with the police escalated. The events are well documented in the filmGrace Periodby Caroline Key and KyoungMook Kim.

In 2013, District Court Judge Won Chan Oh submitted a request for a constitutional review of the lawsafter accepting the argumentmade by sex worker Jeong Mi Kim that sex work fell under her right to self-determination. Therefore, in sentencing her for selling sex the state had violated article 10 of the Korean constitution, which holds that “all citizens shall be assured of their human worth and dignity and shall have the right to pursue happiness”.

This opened a window for a phase of much more intense sex worker activism. In April 2015, sex workers and activists staged a protest in front of the constitutional court where a public hearing was held as part of the review. They submitted a petition signed by nearly 900 sex workers arguing that the government had no right to “use criminal punishment to discourage voluntary sex among adults”. The following June, GGorganised a forumto draw further attention to the fact that “these laws are not simply laws that aim to punish buyers and sellers of sexual services, but have far wider implications … encompass[ing] social issues including sexual morality, sexual self-determination, and the right to choose one’s vocation”.

Sex worker activistYeoni Kimonce said in an interview with Matthias (one of the present authors) that, “the Swedish model is terrible, violates sex workers’ rights, and adds to the stigmatisation of sex work. But, frankly speaking, one could almost say it would be better to have that terrible law than having to continue fearing arrests and police violence under the anti-sex trade laws.” Hearing one of the most seasoned Korean sex worker activists prefer a slightly less terrible law over another should put all talk about ‘choice’ and ‘agency’ into perspective.

In September 2015, Hanteo staged a larger protest in downtown Seoul. Around 1,500 sex workersdemanded an end to the government’s repression, shouting slogans and holding up signs in Korean and English that read “Repeal the anti-sex trade laws!”, “we are workers!” or “adopt Amnesty’s declaration!”.

Last year, when the constitutional courtstruck downthe 62-year-old adultery law, it cited “the country’s changing sexual mores and a growing emphasis on individual rights”. Similar logic should govern the decision on the anti-sex trade laws, which is still pending, however some women’s rights and social conservative groups are continuingto stage proteststo prevent a decision against the laws, citing fears over human trafficking and minors engaging in sex work.

Migration from Asian countries to South Korea has increased in recent years, and nobody suggests that the country is immune tomigrant smuggling or human trafficking. Marriages between comparatively affluent Korean men and poorer southeast Asian women remain common in rural areas, as do the problems arising from illegal practices by marriage brokers or from violence perpetrated by Korean men against their foreign wives, whom they sometimes appear to seek only for reproductive purposes and household or farm labour.

There have also been occurrences of migrants being trafficked into commercial sex venues, but it is crucial to separate human trafficking from consensual adult sex work. Cases of human trafficking or exploitation of migrants have been detected in numerous industries, including in the fishing, agricultural, or manufacturing industries. Migrants of all genders, as well as Korean citizens, are affected by conditions amounting to forced labour. It is therefore disingenuous to suggest that the problem is limited to women who are forced to sell sex, and to thereby disregard the experiences of trafficked persons and migrants in other industries, which include sexualised violence.

We are opposed to any form of violence. Sex and sexualised violence, however, are not the same. Consensual sadomasochistic sexual practices and actual violence are different, just as consensual sex work and being trafficked into the sex industry are different. People may choose to engage in sex work because they experience stigma as single mothers or due to their sexual orientation, or if other factors limit their options on the formal labour market.

Sex work itself is not violence and to suggest otherwise dilutes the meaning of violence. If we really want to curb human trafficking, we have to address the systemic circumstances that marginalise people and render them vulnerable. As sex workers’ rights activists, we have a stake in seeing human trafficking effectively addressed. The battle slogan ‘prostitution is violence against women’ harms both sex workers and trafficked persons as it drives the creation and perpetuation of precisely those failed laws and policies that enable traffickers to prey on vulnerable populations.

About the authors

YuJin self-identifies as a gay sex worker and is a member of Giant Girls, one of two organisations actively campaigning for the rights of sex workers in South Korea.

Popho E.S. Bark-Yi is a feminist researcher and activist in South Korea. Her work focuses on sexuality and on basic income.

Time-delayed “live” coverage

Since live tweeting from Belfast’s Judicial Review Court is not permitted, the below is a time-delayed coverage of the first hearing regarding sex worker activistLaura Lee’s challenge of the “Swedish Model” in N. Ireland, i.e. Clause 15 of the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Further Provisions and Support for Victims) Bill, which criminalises sex workers’ clients (formely Clause 6 of the bill proposal). The first hearing took place on February 19th. You can contribute to Laura Lee’s legal costs by making a donation on GoFundMe.

[01] The following will be a series of tweets regarding last week’s #DECRIMNI hearing at the #Belfast Judicial Review Court. #sexwork

The plans for the “Prostitutes Protection Law” have reached a cul-de-sac, explains Criminal Law Professor Dr. Monika Frommel. Rather than patronising sex workers with criminal and police laws, they should be protected from exploitative brothel operators by using the trade law.

By Prof. emer. Dr. Monika Frommel

Please note that the copyright for this article lies with Dr. Monika Frommel and is not licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Why do politicians fail yet again [1] to adequately regulate prostitution during this legislative period? The goal of a reform should be to control brothel operators as effectively as possible. But instead, a draft bill has been created that will achieve the opposite: the strict and bureaucratic monitoring of sex workers. Brothel operators, on the other hand, have little to be afraid of.

Instead of “protection” from exploitation, the draft bill, modified several times and unlikely to draw a consensus, includes…